A New Theory On The Milley Tale

Foreign Government Involvement--Not A Total Surprise

I’ll be scrambling to stay in touch with what’s going on today. Late in the evening yesterday we go a whiff of an … explanation from Milley. It wasn’t a real denial, but a suggestion that, while he had made those calls, it was all according to the manual of procedures or, like, whatever. It was just routine stuff:

Jennifer Griffin @JenGriffinFNC

Pentagon officials: Gen Milley did not try to insert himself in the chain of command regarding the launch of nuclear weapons, but he made sure everyone knew what their roles were and what they weren’t. They reviewed lawful launch procedures following Pelosi phone call.

But then there’s this (h/t Ray So-Cal, who’s grieving today?):

Jack Posobiec 🇺🇸 @JackPosobiec

BREAKING: At least one of Milley's calls to China was intercepted by a partner nation targeting PRC leadership and resulted in a FVEY rocket of "WTF" to Meade and Bolling, per IC official

Let’s parse this.

“At least one of Milley’s calls” means: At least one but possibly every single one. Coy.

“A partner nation” and FVEY” means: It was a Five Eye nation--one (or more?) of UK, Canada, NZ, or AU. My bet is on the UK, whose GCHQ is said to be even more capable than NSA.

“Meade” is obviously NSA--which presumably shared this info with CIA and, possibly, FBI.

“Bolling” I take to be DIA--Defense Intelligence Agency.

So what does this all mean? First of all, this story could all be cover--that it was actually NSA that picked up the calls, but they don’t want that out in the open for political reasons.

However, taking the story at face value, that means that a key foreign ally was concerned of the constitutional stability of the US, based on what they had picked up. As I said yesterday, foreign governments know there is NOTHING routine or stable about the US military going behind the president’s back--not in this way and to this degree.

But then, apparently, with both US and at least one key ally’s intel establishments concerned about all this … nothing happened. Not until the Afghan withdrawal was totally screwed up in various very scary ways--including the weapon and tech and money transfers.

Therefore, this story going public at this time suggests that one or both of US and/or allied intelligence establishments remain concerned for the constitutional stability of the US under the Zhou regime. Apparently nothing that happened between the January 6 Event and yesterday reassured the concerned parties, and now they want changes.

How far reaching would those changes be? It’s naturally hard to say. The obvious one is to remove Zhou--constitutionally easy but politically a bit tricky.  His ties through Hunter with the PRC would make that exceptionally doable. But there’s always the Kama Sutra conundrum--out of the frying pan into the fire. And it’s interesting that the #3, Speaker Nan, is implicated in Milley’s shenanigans.

What could this all lead to? First we had the removal of Trump through a patently dodgy election. Now we would have a second removal, orchestrated by the IC--meaning, in practical terms, with the CIA in the driver’s seat. That could lead to a first in US history--the installation of a regime that nobody even remotely voted for. With purges of the National Security establishment presumably to follow. It might all be finessed in a formally constitutional way, but what legitimacy would such a regime have--beyond the Beltway?

We’re in uncharted waters here and for now our field of vision is very limited.

Interesting times. It’s all very hard to wrap one’s head around in a truly realistic way. It’s like trying to wake up from a nightmare, but being unable to pull out of it.

Did you notice that I left something out? It’s a big What If. What if--it was the foreign ally that leaked to Woodward, not the USIC? What if that foreign ally--perhaps acting as the frontman for other concerned nations, concerned at what they see going on with the US--are the ones demanding changes? That’s not impossible.